Comment 8 for bug 505078

2010/1/11 Robert Collins <email address hidden>:
> On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 04:48 +0000, Martin Pool wrote:
>>
>> You're already partly using mime here, so I think you might as well do
>> it the rest of the way, by specifying a content-encoding for the
>> attachments.  They could be quoted-printable for things that are
>> mostly text (like tracebacks) but need to be sent byte-for-byte, plain
>> text for things like tracebacks, and base64 for tarballs.
>
> Do you mean transfer encodings perhaps? They already do specify a
> content encoding?

really? where?

they seem to only specify a content-type at the moment.

istm that what is wanted here is a content-transfer-encoding which
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIME#Content-Transfer-Encoding>

> 1. It indicates whether or not a binary-to-text encoding scheme has been used on top of the original encoding as specified within the Content-Type header, and
> 2. If such a binary-to-text encoding method has been used it states which one.

however, this doesn't mark boundaries between attachments.

--
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>